Letters to the Editor
-
@ madamfauntleroy: What?
I don't know how or where you got "racist" from anything I said in my post. A bit sensitive?
And if you read through my posts, I have never referred to any Obama follower as "mindless" or being a "troll."
Finally, I admit that I misread part of the post I replied to. I do apologize when I'm wrong. How about you?
-
@ Jonathan: Okay!
I AM sorry. I read your post twice and still I "misread" it. You're right! Maybe I need new glasses...or new eyes. ;)
-
@ljwalker53
" Second, on the so-called immunity amendment, Clinton did not vote. However, the amendment failed, so it's rather a moot point, considering it was defeated 31-67."
I'm not sure I'm understanding your point here. Are you saying that it's irrelevant that Senator Clinton didn't vote on this issue because the amendment failed? So there is no point in casting a vote if the majority is against you?
-
@ David Blixt: Rezko
It isn't only the Clinton campaign that is asking Obama to answer questions about Rezko. It is reporters at the Chicago Sun-Times, who have been asking for months to go over unanswered questions and information they have about Rezko that does not gibe with Obama's accounts. In addition, a legislative reform group from Chicago has also asked Obama to explain campaign contributions from Rezko that go back to 2004, and to explain contributions through Rezko that found their way to Obama's campaign. Essentially, these are some of the questions that Sun-Times reporters have for him, also. Even ABC News has questioned why Sen. Obama has not come forward about these unanswered questions.
I don't see this as Rovian or Republican!
-
blatantly misogynistic
See now Miss Walker, anyone who says anything against little Miss Clinton you accuse them of being "blatantly misogynistic," a secret code we of the female kind use, to call a man a sexist. Now you 'n I both knows that a black man and a white woman runnin' for president is a historic event. But you, I reckon, have no fear of calling Jonathon "blatantly misogynistic," just 'cause you don't want to agree with him. So my question to you was, and mind you, it was a question, is it ok for us, who do not agree with your spin on little Miss Clinton, to call you a racist. That's all. If the shoe fits...
-
@ ljwalker - on No Vote
Your links were very helpful, but your interpretations were a tad misleading. You made it seem as though both senators skipped the FISA debate. While it is true that Senator Clinton was not present the whole day, Senator Obama came to vote on two of the three measures that day.
That he departed before the final FISA vote is indeed unfortunate. But the two votes he did cast that day are important. One was to declare FISA courts the only vehicle by which to spy on telecommunications (read "no more warrentless wiretaps") and the other was to strip the full bill of the telecom immunity. Those were the two essential votes that day, and he was there for them. After all her work to accuse him of shirking his state duties by voting present, she was not able to do even that.
As to your spin that her presence was not required as the bill failed to pass, I choose to believe you don't mean that. One of the most important legal issues of our time, even a windmill vote is better than none.
As you say, it would be nice if BOTH sides put out information that was complete and accurate.
-
@ little lord baltimore: I Wouldn't Go There
Unless you want to go into Sen. Obama's voting record and his "NV" on significant measures ranging from national security issues, to Iraq, to congressional and judiciary oversight, I wouldn't be too quick to pounce. I'm not going to justify or excuse the fact that Clinton was a NV. OTOH, Obama ALSO missed the vote on the full FISA bill.
-
@ljwalker53
Also, Senator Clinton was in DC for the "crabcake" primaries and chose to skip the vote on the issue of giving retroactive immunity to the telecoms. Obama voted nay.
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/senate_votes_for_retroactive_i.php
I guess the entire FISA issue is moot to Clinton.
-
@ lj: Rezko
I live in Chicago, and thanks to Mr. Rezko's very shady and almost definitely illegal dealings with our current governor, I'm well aware of everything you say.
Earlier in this string I suggested that Senator Obama should sit down with the local papers and answer all their questions on the record once and for all. Not because I believe there is a story here, but simply to put it behind him.
However, if you'll recall, the national media picked up the Republican cant about Whitewater in much this same way. If you honestly cannot see the similarities, I'll leave you in peace. To me, they are striking.
-
@ David Blixt: Obama Has Missed Many Important Votes
If you are going to act as if this vote is "the" most significant regarding national security, that is your prerogative. I look at the whole picture and I have to say that Barack Obama's NVs on significant legislation are really disappointing -- as disappointing to me as I gather Sen. Clinton's NV on these two amendments is to you.
-
@ lj - FISA vote
There you go again. The FISA vote was not the important vote that day. The two earlier measures were.
KANG: "Twirling! Twirling! Twirling towards freedom!"
Except in this case, it seems to be spin...
-
LJ - Concession
I'll defer to your statement about voting records, as I'll admit that I have followed them only very loosely, and cannot say with surety which votes Senator Obama has missed.
-
@LJWalker53: No, let's go there.
You made the point that Clinton not voting on this particular amendment was moot because the amendment was defeated. I asked you to clarify your position on why not voting for an amendment that failed is moot and you respond with,
"I wouldn't go there unless you want to go into Sen Obama's voting record."
Why does the clarification of YOUR point regarding Clinton's vote on this issue depend entirely on your attacking Obama? Unless you have a legitimate, factually accurate, comparison to make, then you are just trying to wave some vague threat of a smear about Obama in the hope that the whole issue, and any valid questioning will go away.
C'mon. You've asked for a higher level of discourse and debate in these comments. You can do better.